Many medical processes, such as treatment for cancer in a patient's thoracic region, require the long term implantation of a gavage feeding tube, hereafter generally referred to as a “feeding tube,” that is anchored in the patient's stomach and extends through the patient's abdominal wall and skin to an exterior source of liquid food or medications. The implantation of such feeding tubes, however, often results in further medical problems for a number of reasons, such as movement of the stomach itself or relative movement between the patient and the exterior source of liquid food or medication, which often result in displacement of the feeding tube and frequently results in laceration, puncturing, distortion or irritation of the feeding tube opening through the abdominal wall. It is therefore generally necessary to provide some means of feeding tube support at the feeding tube opening to prevent or limit motion between the feeding tube and the abdominal wall and skin of the patient in this region.
Feeding tube support devices of the prior art have proven generally unsatisfactory for general use for a number of reasons. For example, the devices described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,792,119 to Marx for a TUBULAR IMPLANT TO BE USED FOR PERCUTANEOUSLY FEED A PATIENT, U.S. Pat. No. 4,344,435 to Aubin for a METHOD AND SURGICALLY IMPLANTABLE APPARATUS FOR PROVIDING FLUID COMMUNICATION WITH THE INTERIOR OF THE BODY, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US2011/0288534 to Aguirre et al. For a DEVICE FOR EXTERNAL PERCUTANEOUS CONNECTIONS, and U.S. Pat. No. 4,393,873 to Nawash et al. For a GASTROSTOMY AND OTHER PERCUTANEOUS TUBES are generally too complex in structure, or require complex implantation methods and apparatus, and therefore too expensive for general use.
In addition, such devices are often and typically detrimental to the patient. For example, the feeding tube support devices of the prior art generally entrap body fluids seeping from the patient's body in the region around the opening through which the feeding tube penetrates the patient's skin while preventing or limiting the flow of air to and cleaning access to the region around the feeding tube opening. These limitations generally result in irritation to and very possibly necrosis of the patent's skin in the region around the feeding tube, and possibly even within the feeding tube passage through the patient's abdominal wall. In addition, the feeding tube support devices of the prior art are typically rigid structures of significant size and frequently cause discomfort to the patient by digging into the skin of the patient as the patient moves about.
Certain other feeding tube devices of the prior art, such as that described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,397,647 to Gordon for a CATHETER STABLIZATION FITTING HAVING A SNAP-OVER COVER, may provide some support to a feeding tube but are attached to the patient at some distance from the feeding tube opening through the patient's abdominal wall and mere prevent or limit disturbance to the feeding tube due to movement between the patient and the exterior source of liquid food or medication and do not and cannot provide the necessary support in the region of the feeding tube opening through the patient's abdominal wall.
Other feeding tube support devices of the prior art, such as that described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,666,433 to Parks for a GASTROSTOMY FEEDING DEVICE, have the virtue of simplicity and thus of reasonable cost, but also have the limitations and disadvantages of the above discussed devices of the prior art. For example, the Parks '433 device includes a disk-like element that bears against the skin of the patient in the region around the feeding tube opening, this providing at least some degree of discomfort to the patient as discussed above. While Parks '433 purports to provide openings through the disk-like element that bears against the skin of the patient around feeding tube opening for to provide air circulation, it is apparent that the described openings are too small to provide any useful degree of air circulation and are in any case blocked by the skin of the patient. The Parks '433 embodiment having radial ridges on the bottom of the disk-like element to space the disk-like element from the skin of the patient still only allows very limited air circulation as the ridges themselves limit air circulation; in addition, the hard, sharp edged ridges will themselves be yet another source of irritation to the skin around the feeding tube opening.
It is therefore apparent that the prior art does not offer a feeding tube support device that offers medical patients comfortable, easy-to-use support for feeding tubes or a feeding tube support device that will not puncture, rip or otherwise irritate the skin around a feeding tube opening or the internal tissue lining of a feeding tube passage or that can reliably prevent necrosis and possible infection.